In abstract
A invoice handed by the Legislature on its final day is a prime precedence for California labor unions, who say “captive audience” classes intimidate employees. Enterprise teams say the invoice violates employers’ free speech rights.
On the ultimate day of their session, California lawmakers despatched Gov. Gavin Newsom a invoice banning employers from forcing employees to sit down via anti-union conferences — the most recent try by Democratic politicians to help union exercise amid a revived labor motion.
If Newsom indicators Senate Invoice 399California would be a part of 9 different states which have just lately handed legal guidelines prohibiting an employer from requiring employees to attend so-called captive viewers conferences about their political or spiritual views.
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, the Democratic vice presidential candidate, signed one such regulation final yr, and has touted it on the marketing campaign path.
The California invoice can cowl discussions of employers’ views on political candidates or laws, however it’s largely aimed toward one particular type of required office assembly — when bosses focus on whether or not employees ought to unionize.
California employees, following a nationwide development, have more and more sought unionization in recent times. Union elections have spiked within the final three years, with practically 17,000 employees voting at greater than 300 California workplaces in 2023. To this point in 2024, greater than 14,000 California employees have voted in a union election, based on a CalMatters evaluation of Nationwide Labor Relations Board knowledge.
The Nationwide Labor Relations Board has usually allowed “captive audience” conferences for many years — offered employers don’t threaten employees or withhold advantages for supporting a union. However the board’s basic counsel beneath President Joe Biden has sought to crack down on them, arguing they’re usually used to intimidate staff.
Enterprise teams say the invoice can be a lot broader, and would infringe on employers’ free speech rights. State bans in Connecticut and Minnesota have been challenged in courtroom. Wisconsin in 2009 was one of many first states to ban such conferences; when employers filed go well with the next yr, arguing it conflicted with federal regulation, the state backed down and agreed to not implement it.
The California Chamber of Commerce made SB 399 one among their most fiercely contested payments this yr. In a legislative alert on Tuesday, the chamber stated the invoice would “effectively chill any discussions related to legislation, regulations, or other ‘political matters.’”
In an August letter to lawmakers opposing the invoice, enterprise teams argued they already can’t coerce employees to vote for sure candidates or to vote in opposition to unionizing, and stated as a result of the invoice may positive bosses for speaking to staff about political opinions however not different issues, it’s a violation of the First Modification.
The invoice consists of exemptions for “political organizations” that make use of individuals whose job duties require them to have interaction in political exercise, however chamber coverage advocate Ashley Hoffman stated within the letter that it’s too obscure.
However supporters say the invoice solely targets intimidation within the office by penalizing employers who punish employees for refusing to attend a “captive audience” assembly.
“If an employer wants to share (their) beliefs at the worksite, that’s fine, but no one should be coerced to listen,” Assemblymember Eloise Gomez Reyesa San Bernardino Democrat, stated on the Meeting ground Friday earlier than voting for the invoice.
The invoice’s passage final week was a win for unions amid a variety of losses this yr within the Legislature, particularly in comparison with the 2023 session.
And whereas the state previously two years has elevated wages for quick meals employees and well being care employeesand boosted employee advantages akin to paid sick dayslabor-backed calls for to make it simpler to unionize or go on strike have been a more durable promote.
“If we just keep doing legislation that makes things better for workers, that’s good, but it’s not the same power that you’re giving workers in the workplace when they’re able to strike, when they’re able to organize without intimidation,” Lorena Gonzalez, chief of the California Labor Federation, advised CalMatters this week.
In 2022, Newsom was reluctant to signal a invoice making it simpler for farmworkers to kind unions by giving them an choice to sign their help with out employers figuring out who was voting. He solely gave his approval after the United Farm Employees drummed up political stress from fellow Democrats, together with Biden. That regulation has now been challenged by growers in courtroom.
Final yr, he vetoed a invoice to permit placing employees to gather unemployment advantages, a proposal that Hollywood writers and actors stated would have helped them via the “hot labor summer” of labor stoppages. Unions tried to revive the invoice this yr, and it handed the Senate however did not get sufficient votes to clear an Meeting committee.
The captive viewers conferences invoice additionally handed the Senate final yr, after which eked out of the Meeting final week with simply over the minimal 41 votes wanted to move (although a handful of Democrats added “yes” votes later). It gained last approval within the Senate Saturday on a 31-9 vote.
The chamber is urging Newsom to veto the invoice. The governor has not taken a place, and has till the top of September to determine.
Two different payments despatched to Newsom final week search to assist laborers reduce out of conventional employee protections. He has rejected variations of each earlier than.
Newsom in 2022 vetoed an enlargement of unemployment insurance coverage to undocumented immigrants, saying that the invoice didn’t determine tips on how to pay for it. The unemployment invoice handed this yr would require the administration to determine that out, after which report the plan again to the Legislature.
Up to now three years, Newsom has twice vetoed an enlargement of office security laws to incorporate home employees, akin to home cleaners, nannies and caretakers, citing considerations about subjecting hundreds of personal houses to attainable office security inspections. The invoice handed this yr exempts employees who’re privately employed by a house owner or who’re despatched to non-public houses by publicly funded applications — akin to county applications that pay caretakers for the aged and disabled.
As an alternative, the invoice that handed this yr places the onus on home cleansing and residential care businesses to make sure their staff are secure.
